A proposal to put in a new cycle path on the southern side of Lammas Land. The comment next to this in the report dismisses it because of the access road. They feel the loss of green space outweighs the need for it.

Recently near Petts Wood station there has been a similar junction where the main flow of traffic is round the corner, whilst being a crossroads, which has been changed to a mini roundabout which slows the traffic more and makes it easier for cyclists. http://osm.org/go/0EEBtsaNj-?m

From the West/Central Area Committee agenda, a proposal to resurface the track from South Green Road to the start of the Grantchester Meadows path. They will consider whether to adopt this on 1st March.

A colleague asked if the gate from Downing to the Downing Site was open again, since he needed to go to Pathology. I said it wasn't, but why didn't he take the route I take, down Norwich St, Panton St, Tennis Court Road. Answer, "because I fell off my bike there, those speed humps are dangerous, and if you go slowly enough not to fall off, it's really slow".

Now I find that worrying. I go my way to avoid the awful traffic jams at the junction by the Catholic Church. I think most people would consider it a safer route. But if some cyclists are being put off going that way, and instead taking the zoo that is Regent St in preference, well, I don't think the traffic calming is doing the job intended.

Too late to fix this here, but we must make it a priority that any future traffic calming in the city or South Cambs doesn't inadvertently act as an anti-cyclist measure and force cyclists onto the much busier main roads which I'm sure everyone would prefer them not to use if there's a better a and quicker route. But if the traffic calming, that was presumably done, in part, to improve cycle safety, has failed, this is a waste of money. The speed humps on Bateman St, unless you do a slalom, you have to cycle over and the ones on Norwich St are viscious. I've just got good at taking them at speed as I've had plenty of practice.

New station that will serve the northern part of Cambridge, specifically the Science Park - but also by extension through the guided bus, villages to Northstowe.

This provides a good opportunity to construct another section of the Chisholm Trail (especially a link over the river and on to Newmarket Road). We must also ensure that any footbridge provides facilities for those with bikes AND that there is adequate cycle parking.

Phase 2 of the River Dour Greenway will connect the existing portion of the River Dour Greenway cycle route with National Cycle Routes 1 and 2 on Dover's seafront. It'll also connect to Regional Cycle Route 17.

The Oyster Bay Trail phase 2 will close a gap in the cycle network between the existing Oyster Bay Trail at Swalecliffe, Herne Bay and Reculver, the Viking Coastal Trail around Thanet, and the Crab & Winkle Way between Whitstable and Canterbury.

This proposed cycle path will remove the need to climb a hill when following the Great Stour Way to reach Canterbury city centre. It'll also increase the proportion of traffic-free path used for the route and remove some areas of potential conflict with other road users due to parked cars.

Completion of this section of the riverside cycle path will allow students to cycle virtually traffic free from the Parham Road Student Village into Canterbury city centre. Making this route cycleable will allow the existing and proposed developments at the Parham Road Student Village to fulfil their car-free objectives.

This attractive, car-free development - heavily used as a cycling and walking route - has gradually turned into an ugly car park in recent months following the temporary removal of enforcement. The County Council are proposing partial re-regulation of parking.

The current layout of the pedestrian crossing at the junction of Winchester road and Vermont close forces cyclists out of the cycle lane and into the flow of traffic. This is a risky maneuver and relies on the patience of the car driver behind the cyclist. A possible solution would be to be extend the cycle lane through the chicane, with give way markings so that pedestrians have right of way.

There is a loading bay in the cycle contraflow cycle lane, which means that the cycle lane is blocked for cyclists as soon as a vehicle is parked there. This means that cyclists have to pull out into the path of oncoming buses, thus making the NCN route unsuitable to young children or inexperienced cyclists.

Here is an ambitious plan for a Bicycle Boulevard from Shoreditch to Fitzrovia, along Old Street, Clerkenwell Road and Theobalds Road, open only to bicycles, buses and motor traffic for local access only.
a. It is now the most cycled route in London, showing that it is the desired EW route.
b. It is of variable width, therefore trying to accommodate bikes, buses, and through traffic in a consistent and safe way is impossible. In other words, a compromise will be a botch job.
c. There will not be mixing of buses and bicycles: bicycles will have a dedicated two way cycle lane on the South side of the street.
d. The Boulevard stops being a mega- EW-rat-run. Motor traffic will have to use Pentonville/City Road.

We have a tandem which fits in all the spaces on trains in Scotland (as far as I know), but we are prohibited from taking it on any except the East Coast line trains. I've been writing to various officials - elected and otherwise - and contributed to the recent review of the Scotrail franchise, but am not getting much joy. No one seems to think it is a big deal. But, for my family, with 2 kids aged 5 and 1, and no car, if we don't go by tandem and train, we can't go anywhere much. The tandem is not a luxury but a practical transport solution. Does anyone else want to join in and make this more than a one-woman issue?

(another related issue: even once the kids can ride their own bikes, we won't be able to use trains much since most only allow 2 reservations).

While some painted "cycle lane" does exist northbound, there is woefully little provision for cyclists considering the huge number that use this section of road each day, a large number of whom are those who work at the General Hospital and other nearby health centres. Southbound cyclists have no real provision of space at all, save a graduated stopline, where cars turning right often try to pass right-turning cycles on the inside. Dale road itself is extremely narrow by winchester road, with almost no pavement space for pedestrians.
Cyclists heading northbound on Winchester road must beat traffic off the line at Dale road to get to the painted centre of Winchester road. North of the traffic light at The Range, the cycle lane is almost non-existent, placing cyclists between 2 lanes of heavy traffic, and cyclists have to stop and wait in this dangerous area in order to turn right onto Wilton road. Furthermore, the road surface, especially at this part of Winchester road, is currently deplorable.

Garratt Lane at Earlsfield station sucks massively for cyclists, and is a jarring interruption to the Wandle Trail (Sustrans route 20). It would be great to extend the riverside path underneath the railway to avoid this dangerous stretch of road.

Six inch high ridge near left side of north bound lane on the south side of the bridge forces cyclists too close to the kerb or into the path of motor vehicles. Issue reported via CTC pothole reporting site. Resurfacing required.

I've visited Riverside to Waterbeach with William Rayner of county cycling team. He's revising signage here and providing it along the St Ives corridor, with the old NCN 51 being renamed Regional Route 24 (blue patch). We've decided finally to continue to sign NCN 11 from Riverside Bridge to Waterbeach Station, and he's looking at suitable (hopefully temporary) wording to advise to follow NCN 51 to Bottisham for destinations beyond Waterbeach, which will hopefully eliminate misrouting those from outside the area.

Our inspection of existing signs showed that only one new signboard was provided on completion 5 years ago of Riverside Bridge. Signboards still send people via Green Dragon. Sustrans considers signage is an important part of any route project.

The intention is to sign Milton Country Park as a destination, not as part of the route, removing route signs within the park, and probably retaining Coles Road as the signed route through the village, though it would be much preferable to have improvements past the shops and the village green, pubs etc.

Retaining the route to Waterbeach as NCN will help keep the gap in people's awareness.

I am planning to contact again the landowner of the missing link between Bottisham Lock and Fen Road, Lode with a suggestion for a low-level route, southeast side of the Bottisham Lode floodbank which is the route of the public footpath, where signs forbid cycling. It might be considered more visually acceptable. All parish councils are for the route, including the one of which he is a member.

Motorised vehicles currently use the rat run through Milner Street to avoid the fraffic lights at Grove Lane/ St Helens St.
This is part of NCN 41 , any extra traffic passing through here detracts from the cycling experience and is negative for residents.
Cyclist comments are needed now !

This contraflow infrastructure is hazardous for several reasons: the path is very narrow - realistically around 0.5m wide, the cyclists is riding in the gutter, at risk of being doored and catching wing mirrors. What caught me out was a vehicle travelling North and turned right to access an entrance. Our sight lines were blocked by parked vehicles in parking bays to the right of the cycle path. Until this situation is addressed cyclists will continue to be vulnerable along this section of the road.

Is this really the best that Edinburgh can do for the flagship national cycle network route 1 to get it to cross Clerk Street? You have to go through a pile of bins, on to the pavement to get round a barrier and then try and judge it right to cross the road, or use the nearby pedestrian crossing.

Southern stretch of Kew road is a busy road, wide enough for cycling provision, but none is provided - southbound has protection of a bus lane for a stretch but north bound has no protection for cyclists at all. This frequently leads to pavement cycling as per the photo.

The Fountain Roundabout is a major barrier to cycling around New Malden. It's a large, multi-lane roundabout with no cycling facilities (and poor pedestrian crossing provision too). Lying just to the south of New Malden High Street it's key to unlocking short journeys by bike to the town centre.

Proposal
To investigate options to provide a safe, continuous route from St James Barton Roundabout to the top of Park Street.

Rationale
Marlborough Street/Upper Maudlin Street/Perry Road/Park Row (known as the Scope Route) is the most desirable route for cyclists from the east of the city to the University, the Triangle, Clifton etc but is heavily trafficked with little cycle provision.

Research has identified three key perceptions that deter people from taking up cycling: lack of personal safety; inconvenience; poor image. Experience from countries in northern Europe shows conclusively that in order for cycling to become a mass activity attracting all ages and abilities these perceptions have to be tackled and potential cyclists must believe they will feel safe, valued and normal. Facilities are needed that form a coherent network, separate cyclists from fast, high volume traffic and offer them a high degree of priority and convenience both on main routes and local roads. The purpose of Bristol's 'Design Cycling' work programme is to create a network and that is convenient, safe and provides speedy access all over the city. A network which a 12 year old would feel comfortable using.

The cycle path crosses the soutbound exit from the M53 at Cheshire Oaks. The exit is light controlled for traffic as they enter the roundabout. This provides a safe time for cyclists to ride across the sliproad. However the lights are not visible to cyclist on the path and there is no light provided to advise cyclists when they can cross.

This makes it very difficult and dangerous for cyclists to know when they can safely cross. This would require no physical change to the road layout simply a new light to show cyclists when to cross.

I have serious concerns about the safety of this portion of the bike path; arising from its recent re-design. Recently my 10 year old son was in a very close “near-miss” with a car turning off the A316 into Bicester Road; and I believe many more similar incidents are likely occurring. Eventually someone will be seriously hurt or killed on it.

However, the improvement in the track leads cyclists to feel more confident in using it – giving a false sense of security.

In particular:
• The segregated track makes it particularly appealing for inexperienced and more vulnerable cyclists (such as kids).
• This track design leads to an increase in the cyclists speed.
• The smooth/quick nature of the track leads inexperienced cyclists to believe that THEY HAVE RIGHT OF WAY across side roads.
• There are no markings on the roads to tell drivers coming in or out of side roads that cyclists could be on the track crossing their path.
• There is a particular challenge for EASTBOUND cyclists.

To avoid stopping at every side road, when on the track travelling Eastbound (as per red arrow on photo) approaching roads such as Bicester road, the cyclist has to simultaneously
(a) check to their FRONT/LEFT side to see if a car is exiting the side road
(b) check BEHIND them on their REAR/ RIGHT hand side to see if a car is about to swing off the A316 into the side road (usually at speed) - (as per orange arrow on photo).

This is a hard combination to perform – looking 180 degrees opposite directions at the same time. If you are an inexperienced cyclist, on an apparently safe track, it is very likely that you will not realise you have to be this vigilant and not check adequately for cars.

Hence, my boy rode across Bicester road from the east and was very nearly hit by a car turning off the A316.

(Note that travelling from the west is somewhat easier as both the vehicles turning in from the A316 and those turning out from the side roads are in your front field of vision).

My suggestions for improving this situation are:
(1) Clearly mark the bike track across the side roads so cars are aware there are cyclists approaching from the side.
(2) Ideally, give cyclists priority across the side roads; so making cars slow to a halt and making it more intuitive for cyclists.
(3) To facilitate this, would require some stopping space for traffic coming on/off the A316 to after the bike track crossing

At roads such as Bicester road the bike track could be curved to the south by about 2m before crossing the side road – this curve in the track would
(a) naturally slow cyclists down as they approach the side road
(b) would provide vehicles moving onto the A316 a decent gap so they can separate the concerns of first negotiating the bike track then focus on getting on the A316;
(c) for vehicles coming off the A316 the additional space would give them space to stop and give way to cyclists.

The surface of this path is awful. It is very pot-holed, and it creates issues for cycles and pushchairs. And for people with visual impairments, it creates hazards as well.

It also needs the white lines changing/removing to avoid further serious injury - Someone has told me that they saw someone slip on the line and break their hip. The white lines are raised and have been repainted - they are slippy for cycle wheels. There is also concern that the white lines would be slippy for pedestrians when wet.